Summer 2015 Prospect Ranking - Round 6 Run Off

[BACKCHECK!!!]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

That's one way of doing it but certainly not the only way. Heck - we don't even know if Granlund is a full time NHLer. Maybe he is a guy that goes up and down his entire career. So the fact that he has played SOME NHL games really doesn't matter.

I'll have to disagree with you an awful lot on that one.

If there's two kids standing side by side, and one of them is playing in the NHL at 21, and the other is not, it's pretty much a no-brainer to me* which one of them I'm going to rate more highly as a future NHL player.

(*unless one of them is a goalie or something)

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by thymebalm

How is out sure fire best player of the three getting the least amount of votes? Hickey and Jankowski have so many question marks compared to Granlund. That's some bold voting.

It's not about who's the best player now...

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

I'll have to disagree with you an awful lot on that one.

If there's two kids standing side by side, and one of them is playing in the NHL at 21, and the other is not, it's pretty much a no-brainer to me* which one of them I'm going to rate more highly as a future NHL player.

(*unless one of them is a goalie or something)

And that's why I'm voting for Dustin Boyd over Brandon Prust in this poll.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

And that's why I'm voting for Dustin Boyd over Brandon Prust in this poll.

That's your example in retort?

A fringe NHLer who made the league at 21, vs a fringe NHLer who made the league at 22?

Boyd scored 28 goals during his disappointing career with the Flames, and went on to lead the KHL in scoring, while Prust scored 2 goals over the same time period, and went on to become a reliable 5 goal scorer in the NHL.

Thinking about it now, I actually would rather have Boyd than Prust.

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

I'll have to disagree with you an awful lot on that one.

If there's two kids standing side by side, and one of them is playing in the NHL at 21, and the other is not, it's pretty much a no-brainer to me* which one of them I'm going to rate more highly as a future NHL player.

(*unless one of them is a goalie or something)

And that's your prerogative but that mindset can be questioned when you are comparing taking completely different paths to the NHL.
Which is to say, Granlund has had the OPPORTUNITY to play in the NHL where as the other two in this poll haven't because they are playing college.
So fundamentally, using that as your decision criteria makes little sense. If it you would have rated Markus Granlund about Johnny Gaudreau at one point.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Jacks

I'd say just rank the next 3 as per this poll, they are clearly the next 3 to go in whichever order.

I really think Klimchuck should be in the conversation with these three. They are all vary close, but to me its Janko, Klimchuck, Granlund, Hickey.

Jankowski is not the closest, but I think he is the most likely to have a real impact on the pace of every game if he does make it. A Big, Strong, Two-way Center, with Hands, Hockey Sense, Vision, that can win faceoffs. On the second line that can completely change the out look of a team from top to bottom.

Klimchuck, might be as close as Granlund to the NHL and for me a probably the most likely to pick up first line minutes long term in the NHL, although probably not as the guy that stirs the drink.

Granlund likely the closest to the NHL and still has good potential to be a top 6 forward. Allot to like there, far from a slight him putting him lower on the list.

Hickey, Looks great but is probably the furthest of the 4 from arriving, right now still probably projects as a guy who might compete for a top 4 role, top 2 would be a home run developmentally, Not far off the development curve of Granlund but further away.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

That's your example in retort?

A fringe NHLer who made the league at 21, vs a fringe NHLer who made the league at 22?

Boyd scored 28 goals during his disappointing career with the Flames, and went on to lead the KHL in scoring, while Prust scored 2 goals over the same time period, and went on to become a reliable 5 goal scorer in the NHL.

Thinking about it now, I actually would rather have Boyd than Prust.

I think you've lost the plot.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

That's your example in retort?

Not that I don't think Granlund is as deserving of votes as the other two guys, but here's some better examples:

Mark Giordano made the NHL later than Dion Phaneuf did.
Pavel Datsyuk was 23 when he made his NHL debut.
Kuznetsov was a first round draft pick who didn't make his NHL debut til he was just shy of 22.

By the way, Jankowski is 20 still. He turns 21 in September. He can still make his NHL debut before he turns 22 as long as Providenece misses the NCAA tourney, which without Gillies is likely.

[HitterD]

Originally Posted by #-3

I really think Klimchuck should be in the conversation with these three. They are all vary close, but to me its Janko, Klimchuck, Granlund, Hickey.

Jankowski is not the closest, but I think he is the most likely to have a real impact on the pace of every game if he does make it. A Big, Strong, Two-way Center, with Hands, Hockey Sense, Vision, that can win faceoffs. On the second line that can completely change the out look of a team from top to bottom.

Klimchuck, might be as close as Granlund to the NHL and for me a probably the most likely to pick up first line minutes long term in the NHL, although probably not as the guy that stirs the drink.

Granlund likely the closest to the NHL and still has good potential to be a top 6 forward. Allot to like there, far from a slight him putting him lower on the list.

Hickey, Looks great but is probably the furthest of the 4 from arriving, right now still probably projects as a guy who might compete for a top 4 role, top 2 would be a home run developmentally, Not far off the development curve of Granlund but further away.

Totally agree with Klimchuk in this grouping. Ive been voti g Granlund but I think so very little seperates those 4 in my mind that I might wake up tomorrow with a completely different order in my head

One thing that sticks out for me is the fact that these 4 are likely to slot in 6-9 in a prospect system that doesnt even factor in recently graduated Gaudreau and Monahan. The quality in the Flames system is still very high.

[Enoch Root]

These three were the next 3 on my list so I am good with it no matter how it shakes out (though I voted Granlund).

Glad to see Jankowski finally getting the credit he deserves.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

That's your example in retort?

A fringe NHLer who made the league at 21, vs a fringe NHLer who made the league at 22?

Boyd scored 28 goals during his disappointing career with the Flames, and went on to lead the KHL in scoring, while Prust scored 2 goals over the same time period, and went on to become a reliable 5 goal scorer in the NHL.

Thinking about it now, I actually would rather have Boyd than Prust.

How would you rather have Boyd over Prust right now? Prust - while overpaid and has his own warts - is definitely a contributing NHL'er, while Boyd could not break into the NHL at all. Prust has become a very good (thus over-paid) NHL'er who fills a big role on teams he plays - physicality and defensive ability mostly, but someone who is also usually on a team's PK unit. Boyd is plying his trade in the KHL. Are you sure you would rather have Boyd?

It is rather easy to find players who have taken longer to break into the NHL but who went on to have some very good careers.

So, Jankowski has been directly compared to Joe Nieuwendyk. Let's take a look at Joe.

Drafted in '85. Spent two seasons in college, and got a 9 game look in the NHL in the 86/87 season. Became an NHL'er in the 87/88 season (and tied Mike Bossy's rookie goal scoring record IIRC).

I won't compare the busts taken before him, but will focus on another good player selected that same draft, and 2nd overall to boot. Much better pedigree than Nieuwendyk, and broke into the NHL the very next season after the draft. Definitely wasn't a bad pick at all - Craig Simpson.

By your definition, it is a no-brainer picking Simpson.

There are a total of ZERO people in this world outside of the Simpson family that would trade a Nieuwendyk away in order to get a Simpson.

This was actually the first example I thought of.

Need a more recent example? Compare our very own TJ Brodie to Luke Schenn. Again, nobody outside the Schenn family would trade a Brodie away to get a Schenn back. Both defencemen. Schenn was a 5th overall pick who played in the NHL the first season after their respective drafts, and Brodie took 3 full seasons before he got a 3 game cup of coffee in the NHL. By your definition, it would be a no-brainer ranking Schenn higher.

It is fine if you want to use pedigree for your own personal rankings. It is fine if you want to use NHL experience. It is fine making any selection accordingly to whatever criteria you wish.

Calling someone out for being wrong on their selections and criteria is the only wrong way to approach it (IMO).

There are prospects with tremendous pedigrees that bust.
There are prospects who get NHL games fairly on that also fizzle out completely.
There are long-term projects that never develop.
There are 'can't miss guys' that completely get their development derailed.

There is no single method that makes this a science with a wrong and a right answer. Heck, even selecting someone other than Bennett at first wouldn't be stupid, and the person you select ahead of him may indeed go on to have the more successful career.

This ranking is based on what you think according to your own criteria. There are tonnes of notable exceptions regardless of the criteria people are using, and these rankings are all 'best guesses' at this point. That is why you will see guys like Jooris being an almost afterthought one year, and suddenly he becomes a pretty good player in the NHL the very next year.

Personally, I feel Jankowski, Hickey, Klimchuk and possibly a few others will become more important players with more of an impact on the Flames than Granlund will, and I will choose them accordingly in every round. Will I be right? Only time will tell. What I will do is argue the strengths of 'my guy' that I am voting in every round and why I am personally selecting said player, rather than try to force-feed my own criteria on someone else. It is really fine if you want to use "NHL Experience" as the most important (or at least, heavily weighted) factor in your ranking. Just know that there are countless exceptions to your methodology - and countless exceptions to any methodologies anyone else is using as well.

Oh, and I really do like Granlund as a prospect, but I don't like the way he was getting his points (seemed more of the 'luck' factor in a lot of his points early on). However, I do think he has an absolute snipe of a shot, and has good hockey sense. I do think he will be a player, though I look at last season as almost a 'stalled' season developmentally. There are lots of AWESOME scorers at the NHL level who just can't seem to replicate it at the NHL level (hello Kolanos). I don't think Granlund is one such prospect - but he also hasn't proven he isn't either. It is fair game to rank him lower this year than last year, and every prospect will get moved up and down accordingly to how they did, and how other prospects did (and who else the Flames acquired). I just feel there are other players with more potential in the system right now that I prefer as prospects over Granlund, but that doesn't mean I dislike Granlund (quite the contrary actually).

[FireGilbert]

I wasn't able to vote in the previous polls and appreciate the limited choices on this one.

I also don't see how Granlund isn't running away with this. He has already shown NHL ability and has 2nd line potential.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

And that's your prerogative but that mindset can be questioned when you are comparing taking completely different paths to the NHL.
Which is to say, Granlund has had the OPPORTUNITY to play in the NHL where as the other two in this poll haven't because they are playing college.
So fundamentally, using that as your decision criteria makes little sense. If it you would have rated Markus Granlund about Johnny Gaudreau at one point.

You could also say that the reason Jankowski hasn't had the opportunity is because the Flames believe he isn't ready yet. Some prospects leave college to turn pro after 1 year, some 2 years etc. Jankowski is going back for his 4th year. He's still a good prospect but Granlund has accomplished more.

Anyways I voted for Hickey. He's on a good trajectory.

[Caged Great]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

You could also say that the reason Jankowski hasn't had the opportunity is because the Flames believe he isn't ready yet. Some prospects leave college to turn pro after 1 year, some 2 years etc. Jankowski is going back for his 4th year. He's still a good prospect but Granlund has accomplished more.

Anyways I voted for Hickey. He's on a good trajectory.

Part of the reason for Janko returning to the NCAA has to do with the fewer games he will have to play. More time for the weight room.

He is a lot bigger than he was, but he could still add 15 pounds or so onto his frame without skipping a beat. More time on the weights will help shave a few lbs off the goal weight.

[Imported_Aussie]

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

I wasn't able to vote in the previous polls and appreciate the limited choices on this one.

I also don't see how Granlund isn't running away with this. He has already shown NHL ability and has 2nd line potential.

The beauty of a poll like this is that with group this size we get a good blend of people voting with more emphasis on upside and others with more emphasis on NHL readiness.

I picked Hickey, I see his upside as a 20 min + D who plays in all situations, a #3 or top pairing guy.
Granlund and Jankowski to me are guys who could hit second line, but may be 2/3 line tweeners

[Lanny_McDonald]

The Flames need size and skill. Jankowski fits that need to a tee.

I really like Markus Granlund, and would like to see him as a winger on this team, but in the long term I don't see him as a fit with the direction the western conference is going. I think he has a shorter shelf life in Calgary than he might have elsewhere, because of the lack of size we have up front. I think this might dog him as he tries to find his place in the NHL where ever he goes. He's got the skill, but is lacking the size and speed to be ranked this high.

Hickey is an exciting prospect that the Flames have very high hopes for. I think he needs to follow up last season's performance with another good one. He kind of came out of no where, which means I try and temper my enthusiasm and wait to see some consistency in performance. I think he will have another great year, but I have to see it before slotting him above Jankowski.

I could easily see Jankowski playing on a line with Joe Colborne and Hunter Smith that can shut down the opposition's best line and chip in some offense from that third line slot. He could also slot in nicely in the number two center role, but with Monahan and Bennett in front of him, that third line slot might be perfect for him. The kid just has so many possibilities because of his skill and ability to play in any situation. Seems like a natural here.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

I'll have to disagree with you an awful lot on that one.

If there's two kids standing side by side, and one of them is playing in the NHL at 21, and the other is not, it's pretty much a no-brainer to me* which one of them I'm going to rate more highly as a future NHL player.

(*unless one of them is a goalie or something)

I don't think NHL executives think that way. I think they realize circumstance brings player X into the NHL for a 30 some games, but is he penciled into your opening night roster this fall? Probably not. So he's there but not there.

A guy like Hickey is trending towards a potential top pairing defenseman in the NHL which is so highly valuable that Treliving is fielding calls in droves from other GMs.

Having said that, I certainly respect picking Granlund here. There are no easy choices.

I think Hickey is a top pairing upside with a risk that he may stall.
I think Janokowski is 2nd line center upside with a risk that he may be a fourth line guy.
I think Granlund is a top 6 upside with little fear that he's an NHLer .

So I get the thinking. What I don't get is the thinking that there is only one way to think.

[Strange Brew]

I have to go with Granlund here. I don't agree with the belief that he is somehow finsihed developing while others are continuing to grow. I expect (hope?) he will be even better this year and make a scoring impact with the big club.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

So, Jankowski has been directly compared to Joe Nieuwendyk. Let's take a look at Joe.

Drafted in '85. Spent two seasons in college, and got a 9 game look in the NHL in the 86/87 season. Became an NHL'er in the 87/88 season (and tied Mike Bossy's rookie goal scoring record IIRC).

I won't compare the busts taken before him, but will focus on another good player selected that same draft, and 2nd overall to boot. Much better pedigree than Nieuwendyk, and broke into the NHL the very next season after the draft. Definitely wasn't a bad pick at all - Craig Simpson.

By your definition, it is a no-brainer picking Simpson.

There are a total of ZERO people in this world outside of the Simpson family that would trade a Nieuwendyk away in order to get a Simpson.

This was actually the first example I thought of.

Need a more recent example? Compare our very own TJ Brodie to Luke Schenn. Again, nobody outside the Schenn family would trade a Brodie away to get a Schenn back. Both defencemen. Schenn was a 5th overall pick who played in the NHL the first season after their respective drafts, and Brodie took 3 full seasons before he got a 3 game cup of coffee in the NHL. By your definition, it would be a no-brainer ranking Schenn higher.

I agree with your point that just taking how they are playing now isn't the best way to rank players but disagree with your examples because there is hindsight bias that clouds the issue when looking at the past in those cases.

Both of those players followed an unexpected development curve.

If the Flames were offered Craig Simpson for Niewendyk during the 1986/87 season (19//20 years old) they would have made that trade.

Simpson had 26 goals and 51 points in the NHL, and Niewendyk was still kind of an unheard of kid that wasn't putting up good but not unheard of numbers in the NCAA.

Just two years earlier when they were both playing in the NCAA, Simpson had put up 2.00PPG and Niewendyk was at 1.55ppg

If you are doing a prospect ranking that year it is probably clear that Simpson would have been ranked higher since the development path of Niewendyk scoring 50 the next season would have been unthinkable.

Same thing with Brodie and Schenn. If you would have proposed that trade to Flames GMs or on CP 2 or 3 years after the draft it would have happened instantly.

Schenn was still developing nicely, was a + player and had put up 17 points as a 19 year old d-man. Brodie had a good season, but nothing remarkable.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Missed the voting, but I appreciate the run-off. Very interesting that Janko won (who was my pick in the original Rd 6).